Practical application and evaluation of usage of devices for biochemical and cytological urinary status

Aim To explore advantages and disadvantages of visual and automateddipstick reading for biochemical urine analysis, and tocompare classical methods (reaction of protein confirmation,examination of urinary sediment) with dipstick analysis.Methods Testing was conducted as a prospective study in theInstitute of Occupational Health of Zenica-Doboj Canton,Bosnia and Herzegovina. Urine samples were collected duringthe period of three months (from February till May 2012)from two groups of patients: 100 urine samples from healthypeople (annual health screenings) and 100 urine samples frompatients with urinary tract disorder. Visual and automated readingof two devices (Miditron Junior II Roche and MissionU120 Urinanalysator ACON Lab. Inc.) and two kinds of dipstickswere compared.Results The Mission U120 showed statistically significantlower levels of leukocytes and erythrocytes in urine comparedto Miditron Junior II (p=0.0005 and p=0.005, respectively),and cytological control was crucial for these estimates. In thefirst group of healthy people proteins in urine were found in76 out of 100 cases (76%) in automated reading. This was notshown in visual reading of test stripes (20% sulphosalicylic acidtest was negative). In the second group of patients visual andautomated reading of dipsticks for nitrites was not followed bycytological findings.Conclusion Test strips application should be monitored consideringtheir false positive and false negative results. Devicesfor automated test strips reading are important part of modernlaboratory. Due to disadvantage of classical urinary sedimentanalysis the aim should be focused on devices for completelyautomated urine analysis.